UncleCustard

UncleCustard t1_j2u4an9 wrote

I know Uber is a private company. But it would help the situation. I could be content with a private option instead of nothing. As far as the pre requisite goes, I understand why there is a lack of funding. But maybe we could offer some financial or tax reduction for those with no options. Rural MA is a different life than Springfield, Worcester and Boston. That's what I think the article is getting at. We need a different type of Assisi stance. Representation is the wrong word. It's what we get out of our representation that needs to be different.

2

UncleCustard t1_j2t7n1s wrote

I don't fully agree with the globe. But I agree the needs also aren't met of the people. No high speed internet, some towns don't have a anyone you can easily call to deal with basic issues (trash pickup, taxes, etc). The one thing I will say, while everyone was head over heals about issues with the T (as it should be). Some towns don't have an Uber, taxi, public bus, or anyone reasonable transportation outside their own. Literally 0 options.

25

UncleCustard t1_its1luu wrote

Solution? More people should get abortions. We should have incentivized you genetics. Do not give tax breaks to those who have children. Tax them at a higher rate. 5% per child. Use that money to fund the infrastructure we need to support them. Those who don't have kids should get tax breaks. Extra week of vacation. Special lanes on the roads. Discounts on utilities.

−1

UncleCustard t1_itrxg0u wrote

Moving west is only going to create a bigger problem. More traffic going east in the AM and more going west in the PM. Remote work isn't prevalent enough to fix that. You basically said "move where the job market doesn't pay well or drive 3 hours a day to make a good paycheck." If remote work was the solution your idea MIGHT play out well. But it's not the solution.

0